1990 US Open Sigel & Varner - 5 Inch Pockets

[straightline]

C'mon, man!

Dipoolmacy. These old guys were used to presiding over the brung what followed you home dog show. How would they do in the World Kennel Club? Some may rise many would fold.
There was a Gary Busey line from some show I can't recall - " Look at the fire power" I think they lost anyway - movie right? But that's the point.

 

[iusedtoberich]

This match is live now on Acucstats, it's the 1991 US Open, 1 year later than this thread's topic. Buddy just said a few times "these pockets are tight at 4 3/4 inches"

 

[BasementDweller]

This match is live now on Acucstats, it's the 1991 US Open, 1 year later than this thread's topic. Buddy just said a few times "these pockets are tight at 4 3/4 inches"

Every video of McCready is the same -- flashes of greatness, followed by wild misses. I've been watching all these old matches and I pay the monthly subscription to watch the members only ones too. I got to say -- a lot of the tales we've read over the years about most of these players -- don't hold up under closer scrutiny. I don't think Earl even looks as good as expected looking back. I know that's sacrilegious to say around these parts.The only two that have really impressed me -- are Sigel and Varner. I actually think both of them cued better than Earl ever did. Earl's technique was really wonky with A LOT of shoulder movement. I know this time frame highlights Varner right when he's super hot, but still... Efren is pretty much how I remember -- really talented but a bit reckless. Probably because he just loved being creative.

All in all, I love the old matches, but they are hard to watch if you keep your rose colored glasses on.

 

[RidgeRaider]

Every video of McCready is the same -- flashes of greatness, followed by wild misses. I've been watching all these old matches and I pay the monthly subscription to watch the members only ones too. I got to say -- a lot of the tales we've read over the years about most of these players -- don't hold up under closer scrutiny. I don't think Earl even looks as good as expected looking back. I know that's sacrilegious to say around these parts.The only two that have really impressed me -- are Sigel and Varner. I actually think both of them cued better than Earl ever did. Earl's technique was really wonky with A LOT of shoulder movement. I know this time frame highlights Varner right when he's super hot, but still... Efren is pretty much how I remember -- really talented but a bit reckless. Probably because he just loved being creative.

All in all, I love the old matches, but they are hard to watch if you keep your rose colored glasses on.

Yeah, the whole "So and so went the whole day without missing and gave anyone the 7" seems like some fabrication and exaggeration, but we do have to remember, these guys were the BEST around, for their time. So, people talked about them like they were gods, because they were that good compared to your average bar player.

Now, everyone has seen the robotic pros play who string together 5-7 break and runs, playing perfect position and patterns with perfect mechanics. Of course the old pros are going to show their flaws compared to the new pros. Look at videos of people play pro football or baseball from 70s and 80s, or my favorite... Hockey. Hockey was doing some goofy shit back in the Gretzky era, you had goalies who didn't know how to play the game, and guys like Gretzky that could score at will. Everyone looks back fondly on the great one, but there's not many making an argument for their talent and skill matched up to the players bred for the sport now a days.


That being said, pool stories are always exaggerated and the past is always looked back on with rose colored glasses. The pros of the past were amazing in their own ways. I don't care if they had their flaws, they were a lot more entertaining to watch than what we have today.

 

[DrCue'sProtege]

I just watched the Accu-Stats DVD of the 2001 Masters match (semi-finals) between Efren and Earl. Late in the match this was said:

Grady: "They are trending towards bigger pockets"

Buddy: "I prefer bigger pockets myself"

 

[skogstokig]

Every video of McCready is the same -- flashes of greatness, followed by wild misses. I've been watching all these old matches and I pay the monthly subscription to watch the members only ones too. I got to say -- a lot of the tales we've read over the years about most of these players -- don't hold up under closer scrutiny. I don't think Earl even looks as good as expected looking back. I know that's sacrilegious to say around these parts.The only two that have really impressed me -- are Sigel and Varner. I actually think both of them cued better than Earl ever did. Earl's technique was really wonky with A LOT of shoulder movement. I know this time frame highlights Varner right when he's super hot, but still... Efren is pretty much how I remember -- really talented but a bit reckless. Probably because he just loved being creative.

All in all, I love the old matches, but they are hard to watch if you keep your rose colored glasses on.

but the cloth they played on was made of gravel and stuff

 

[Magictrat007]

if 4 and 1/8th inch pockets were a thing back then I’m sure players like Hall, Strickland, Varner, Reyes, Bustamante would have adjusted and played great. I’ve seen Earl play on a very tight 10 ft table about 12 years ago and he played fantastic pool. They played on what they were given.

 

[straightline]

Well there were shimmed pockets as well personalized one offs so, that.

 

[T411]

Yeah, the whole "So and so went the whole day without missing and gave anyone the 7" seems like some fabrication and exaggeration,

I get for some that it’s hard to believe, but it’s not an exaggeration. I can’t literally guarantee it to you, but I can tell you going the whole day without missing a ball is true… more than one day is even true. I’m not counting a player getting stuck and having to push out or having to go three rails not to foul. I’ve seen players do it.

 

[skogstokig]

if 4 and 1/8th inch pockets were a thing back then I’m sure players like Hall, Strickland, Varner, Reyes, Bustamante would have adjusted and played great. I’ve seen Earl play on a very tight 10 ft table about 12 years ago and he played fantastic pool. They played on what they were given.

earl doesn't/didn't have poor fundamentals. his follow through has always been straight as a die, it's just that he does it faster than others, which leads people to assume (as with other fast players) that "he rushed it". it's not dissimilar to filler, the connection and follow through.

earl would have thrived on the new 9b tour if he was younger and not mental.

but i agree with basementdweller, that for many of those players it would have been torture. i watched an old one pocket match with strawberry and grady some week ago and it was at the level that had they played buffalos today, they would be out by the third round. not because of pocket size, but because of inferior play. and i love grady, he's an absolute legend who did a lot for one pocket.

 

[Cornerman]

Every video of McCready is the same -- flashes of greatness, followed by wild misses. I've been watching all these old matches and I pay the monthly subscription to watch the members only ones too. I got to say -- a lot of the tales we've read over the years about most of these players -- don't hold up under closer scrutiny. I don't think Earl even looks as good as expected looking back. I know that's sacrilegious to say around these parts.The only two that have really impressed me -- are Sigel and Varner. I actually think both of them cued better than Earl ever did. Earl's technique was really wonky with A LOT of shoulder movement. I know this time frame highlights Varner right when he's super hot, but still... Efren is pretty much how I remember -- really talented but a bit reckless. Probably because he just loved being creative.

All in all, I love the old matches, but they are hard to watch if you keep your rose colored glasses on.

Good assessment.

 

[Cornerman]

if 4 and 1/8th inch pockets were a thing back then I’m sure players like Hall, Strickland, Varner, Reyes, Bustamante would have adjusted and played great. I’ve seen Earl play on a very tight 10 ft table about 12 years ago and he played fantastic pool. They played on what they were given.

Exactly. Sigel would have won just as many titles.

 

[Monti]

Can anyone smarter than me get the pocket measurements from the video and then Input into DrDave ´s table difficulty factor app. Be interesting to see what it comes up with

 

[BasementDweller]

Exactly. Sigel would have won just as many titles.

I don't think anybody can win that many titles in today's game. It's just too hard for the elites to separate themselves. But would he be among the elite in today's game? I didn't use to think so, but I think I was wrong.

 

[boogieman]

Every video of McCready is the same -- flashes of greatness, followed by wild misses. I've been watching all these old matches and I pay the monthly subscription to watch the members only ones too. I got to say -- a lot of the tales we've read over the years about most of these players -- don't hold up under closer scrutiny. I don't think Earl even looks as good as expected looking back. I know that's sacrilegious to say around these parts.The only two that have really impressed me -- are Sigel and Varner. I actually think both of them cued better than Earl ever did. Earl's technique was really wonky with A LOT of shoulder movement. I know this time frame highlights Varner right when he's super hot, but still... Efren is pretty much how I remember -- really talented but a bit reckless. Probably because he just loved being creative.

All in all, I love the old matches, but they are hard to watch if you keep your rose colored glasses on.

I agree but I just love watching Keith play. When he's in a gear it's a joy to watch. He's a legit comedian at times too.

Tournament style pool was still somewhat in it's infancy. Slow cloth, little tech, no commonly and readily available instruction like today. It was the wild west. They were the best then and had a champion mindset. Had they grew up in an era similar to today I feel they would still have the champion mindset and some could still compete, especially if they embraced the tech/conditions/info available now.

These guys were the wild west gunslingers. Real scrappers. Nowadays we have Olympic style marksmen, with the tech and knowledge base to go with it. They are standing on the shoulders of giants.

You will notice comparatively wonky strokes, bad form, but these guys would still destroy all of the guys at your local pool hall. Pool wasn't as refined back then but honestly it gives it a lot of charm. I learn more for my own game watching these guys or actually semi pros than watching the pros on perfect conditions. Most places I play have shit conditions, except for my own basement. You have to play differently "out in the wild" if you have good conditions at home. Slow/dirty cloth and rails, unmitigated humidity, dirty and worn balls, non level tables, poor lighting, etc. If you watched this match to the interview at the end, Keith talked about how damp the table was, and that in and of itself can account for a lot of the misses made by both players.

All in all, it was an enjoyable match to watch.

 

[fastone371]

Wow, you must be a really good pool player!!! If you are calling GC III pockets "5 gallon buckets" what are you calling Valley 7' table pockets?
What is your fargorate?

Valleys are actually under 5", I never measured but I would guess about 4 3/4", they just seem big because they have short shelf. A Gold Crown of that era was typically over 5", usually about 5 1/8".

 

[fastone371]

You got me, Romines has large pockets.

But how do you not love that place with all those Gold Crowns. Its an hour drive for me and I have a Gold Crown in my basement but there's just something about all those GC's under 1 roof that draws me there.

 

[Magictrat007]

earl doesn't/didn't have poor fundamentals. his follow through has always been straight as a die, it's just that he does it faster than others, which leads people to assume (as with other fast players) that "he rushed it". it's not dissimilar to filler, the connection and follow through.

earl would have thrived on the new 9b tour if he was younger and not mental.

but i agree with basementdweller, that for many of those players it would have been torture. i watched an old one pocket match with strawberry and grady some week ago and it was at the level that had they played buffalos today, they would be out by the third round. not because of pocket size, but because of inferior play. and i love grady, he's an absolute legend who did a lot for one pocket.

Strawberry and Grady were not top flight ball strikers(by pro standards). IMO opinion a world class 9 ball player from any era would adjust. Kim Davenport and Luther Lassiter would do fine.i have a friend who was a strong short stop in the 80s and 90s and he was still playing great pool 8 years ago on tight equipment and he was never world class. Are the players today slightly better(for a number of reasons), probably

 

[skogstokig]

Strawberry and Grady were not top flight ball strikers(by pro standards). IMO opinion a world class 9 ball player from any era would adjust. Kim Davenport and Luther Lassiter would do fine.i have a friend who was a strong short stop in the 80s and 90s and he was still playing great pool 8 years ago on tight equipment and he was never world class. Are the players today slightly better(for a number of reasons), probably

i was strictly talking one hole in that last paragraph, in case that wasn't very obvious. they are both 1p hall of famers, and buffalo's is the biggest/best 1p tournament

 

[sudocrushms]

earl would have thrived on the new 9b tour if he was younger and not mental.

Emphasis on the "not mental" portion. The guy's biggest enemy is himself...